• To: XML List Developers <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed?)
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:58:26 -0400
• In-reply-to: <26B5424A-181E-4A13-B9DB-4E63AD738AB0@e...>
• References: <20060331181515.52963.qmail@w...> <26B5424A-181E-4A13-B9DB-4E63AD738AB0@e...>

On Mar 31, 2006, at 1:46 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> No, I don't think that's true. If the DOM had been created for  
> Javascript it would be a *lot* less horrible than all the hoops it  
> had to jump through to support utterly braindead languages like Java.

FWIW. The DOM API is defined in an XML file, and the bindings  
generated from that. The idea was to provide a common API that would  
be mapped to the underlying languages as best as possible (at one  
point IDL was used), meaning that it would not be ideal in all cases  
(or any cases even), but "good enough".

In addition, the original DOM API proposal was generated in IDL  
directly from the SGML property set. Supporting browser-based notions  
(like live node lists) came later.

• Prev by Date: Ajax Developers' Day to Kick Off XTech 2006 Conference
• Next by Date: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed?)
• Previous by thread: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed?)
• Next by thread: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread